DA fights giving break to youths serving life
For years, Curtis Brooks has been in a prison cell awaiting a chance to be released and start a new life. On Wednesday, with an Arapahoe County courtroom filled with family, supporters and a national documentary film crew, the 38-year-old’s chance came to a grinding halt when the Colorado Supreme Court issued a temporary stay on his court hearing.
The stay came after prosecutors for the 18th Judicial District filed a last-minute petition asking the high court to rule on the constitutionality of a 2016 state law that gives special considerations to some of 48 people who were sentenced to life without parole for crimes committed as juveniles.
The move left Brooks’ 75year-old grandmother, Theresa Bowser — who had traveled from Maryland in hopes of seeing her grandson released from prison — in tears. And Brooks’ legal team had strong criticism for District Attorney George Brauchler and his team, whom they accused of trying to derail justice for a man who deserves a second chance.
“I was just hoping he would be released before I die,” said Bowser. “But it just keeps going. I don’t know if I will make it.”
Wednesday’s courtroom drama was the latest chapter in Colorado’s efforts to comply with a 2012 U.S. Supreme Court decision that determined it was unconstitutional to sentence juveniles to automatic life without parole. The decision forced all 50 states to review such cases, and in Colorado the legislature passed a law in 2016 that determined how the cases would be addressed. The law offered special considerations for some of the 48 affected by the higher court’s ruling.
Those cases finally are appearing on dockets across the state, and Brooks is the first of four scheduled for resentencing hearings over the next month in Arapahoe County District Court. It was unclear how the
district attorney’s petition will affect those other cases. Already, some of the 48 have received new sentences in other jurisdictions.
Brooks was sentenced in 1997 for his role in the 1995 robbery and shooting death of Christopher Ramos, 24. Brooks, age 15 at the time of the crime, was one of four teenagers who participated in the fatal carjacking, but he did not fire the fatal shot.
Brooks, who has served 23 years in prison, hopes that a new sentence, combined with credits earned for model behavior behind bars, could lead to his immediate release. But prosecutors want Arapahoe County Chief District Judge Carlos Samour Jr. to resentence him to 40 years, meaning he could be released on parole sometime during the next 17 years.
Brooks’ defense team accused Brauchler of unnecessarily delaying the outcome of his case. It’s especially troubling, his lawyer said, because of the racial disparities in the case. Brooks, who is black, was sentenced to life without parole even though he did not shoot Ramos. Two white teens, who also did not shoot Ramos, already have been released from prison.
“I’m aggravated,” said Ashley Ratliff, one of Brooks’ defense attorneys. “This is so disconcerting, not only to Curtis Brooks but to Christopher Ramos because this places his family in uncertainty.”
Brooks, who has expressed remorse and worked to better himself in prison, deserves to have his case move forward, Ratliff said. And Brauchler is delaying justice for him, she said.
“There is zero reason for him to be further punished,” Ratliff said.
But Brauchler said his team had no choice but to petition the state Supreme Court.
In October, Samour determined the state’s law regarding juvenile life without parole was unconstitutional. On Monday, Samour reversed his earlier opinion and declared the law constitutional.
It took prosecutors time to write their Supreme Court petition, and they filed it as fast as they could, which turned out to be Tuesday night, he said.
“We respectfully disagree with Judge Samour,” Brauchler said. “It’s not like we snuck up on anyone.”
As for the accusations that he is derailing justice and further punishing a man who already has been the victim of racial dispari- ties in sentencing, Brauchler said he was offended.
“Isn’t that just the typical, outrageous, scurrilous claim you get from the defense bar when they don’t get their way?” he said.